SB 



V. 



IITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
BULtETIN No. 806 

Joint Contribation from the Bureau of Plant Industry. WM. A. TAYLOR, Chief 
and the Bureau of Crop Estimates. L. M. ESTABROOK. Chief 



Washington, D. C. 



December 8, 1919 



PEACHES: PRODUCTION ESTIMATES 

AND IMPORTANT COMMERCIAL 

DISTRICTS AND VARIETIES 

By 

H. P. GOULD, Bureau of Plant Industry, and 
FRANK ANDREWS, Bureau of Crop Estimates 



CONTENTS 

Page 

Relative Importance and Ebctent of the Peach Industry 1 

Estimated Production of Peaches 2 

Outstanding Features of the Peach Industry * 9 

Important Commercial Districts and Varieties, by States .... 10 

New England States 10 

M:ddle Atlantic States 12 

East North-Central States . • 14 

West North-Central States W 

South Atlantic States 18 

East South-Central States 24 < 

West South-Central States 26 

Mountain States ' 28 

Pacific States 31 

Index of States S5 




WASHINGTON 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1919 




.^ 




Glass(SJ^ 07/ 
Book>6r(^v3 



s^'"!^ 

^ a^ 



AS 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 




BULLETIN No. 

Joint Contribution from the Bureau of Plant In- 
dustry, WM. A. TAYLOR, Chief, and the Bureau 
of Crop Estimates, L. M. ESTABROOK, Chief 




jTW^'^W't. 



Washington, D. C. 



December 8, 1919 



PEACHES: PRODUCTION ESTIMATES AND IM- /^^ 
PORTANT COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS AND 

VARIETIES. 

By H. P. Gould, Biirea^i- of Plant Industry, and Frank Andrews, Bureau of 

Crop Estimates. 



CONTENTS. 



Page. 
Relative importance and extent of 

the peach industry 1 

Estimated production of peaches 2 

Outstanding features ' of the peach 

industry 9 

Important commercial districts and 

varieties, ]>y States 10 

New England States 10 

Middle Atlantic States 12 

East North-Central States 14 



Page. 



Important commercial districts and 
varieties, by States — Continued. 

■West North-Central States 16 

South Atlantic States 18 

East South-Central States 24 

West South-Central States 26 

Mountain States 28 

Pacflc States 31 

Index of States 33 



RELATIVE IMPORTANCE AND EXTENT OF THE PEACH INDUSTRY. 

The peach, though far below the apple/ which greatly exceeds any 
other fruit in both acreage and crop value, is second with respect to 
these two standards of comparison. This is shown clearly in figure 1, 
which is based on the Thirteenth Census. While the last decade has 
witnessed some changes, it is doubtful whether those changes have 
affected materially the relative positions of the more important 
fruits. Nectarines are grouped with peaches in figure 1, but the 
total production of nectarines is so small as to be a negligible factor. 

The geographical distribution of peach trees is shown in figures 2 
and 3, both of which are based on the Thirteenth Census. The census 

1 See Gould, H. P., and Andrews, Frank, " Apples : Production Estimates and Important 
Commercial Districts and Varieties," Bui. 485, Dept. of Agr. 48 pp., 16 figs. 1917. This 
bulletin is obtained only from the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing 
Office, at a cost of 10 cents. 

139075°— Bull. 806—19 1 



2 <«■ BULLETIN 806, IT. S. DEPAETMEISTT OF AGRICULTimE. 

data, which show the distribution on a tree basis, are reduced in tliese 
maps to an acre basis for conA^enience of expression. As in figure 1, 
nectarines, which are grouped with peaches, are of such small impor- 
tance as to be without substantial effect on the peach data. 

ESTIMATED PRODUCTION OF PEACHES. 

The estimates of the annual production of peaches for the years 
1900 to 1919, inclusive, api)ear in Table I. 

The estimates for the years 1900 to 1908 are based on the census re- 
port for the crop of 1899, while for the years 1910 to 1919, inclusive, 
they are based on the census figures for the crop of 1909. 

The variation in the size of the peach crop from year to year is 
shown in figure 4. ^'\'liile all census data as well as estimates based 



MILLIONS OF ACRES 


FRUIT 


MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 


,, 3 ; 1 




10 20 30 ".0 SO 60 70 60 


J 


Lnr 


1 1 


n^ 


1 


^^ 


APPLES 
PEACHES & NECTARINES 


1^ 





Bm 




■d— 




,. 


B 












■ 


^ 


^^ 


nJ 


= 


^^ 




























H 


GRAPES 




1 






























■ 
■ 


STRAWBERRIES 
ORANGES 




















•em 


















^ 


PLUMS & PRUNES 


■■at 


































H 


PEARS 


Hi 


































d 


CHERRIES 


IH 




































RASPBERRIES & LOGANBERRIES 


■ 1 


































BLACKBERRIES & DEWBERRIES 


■ 




































LEMONS 


I 




































APRICOTS 


1 




































POMELOS 
CRANBERRIES 


B 

1 



















Fig, 1. — Diagram showing the relative importance, acreage, and crop values of the 
principal fruits of the United States for the year 1909, based on the report of the 
Thirteenth Census. (From the Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture for 1915.) 

on those data are expressed in terms of the total crop, including both 
home consumption and the commercial crop, the annual variation in- 
dicated suggests also the fluctuating character of that portion of the 
crop which enters "into commerce. 

Climatic conditions doubtless are the most potent causes of large 
annual variation in the size of the crop. Most important of these 
are adverse winter temperatures and the occurrence of spring fi-osts 
during the blossoming period. In addition, warm periods during the 
winter often cause the fruit buds to start enough to become tender. 
In this condition they are likely to be killed later, even by tempera- 
tures that are not unseasonable. On the other hand, the effect of a 
frost during the blossoming period is not always in proportion to its 
severity, but depends to some extent upon the strength and vigor of 
the blossoms themselves. 



peaches: peoductiox estimates, etc. 



S 




Fig. 2. — May of tlie United States, sliowiu^ tbe distribution and approximate acreage of 
peach trees of bearing age, based on tii& Tbirteentli Census. Eacb dot roproseuts 500 
aci^es. The solid Wack areas indicate relatively great densitj' of planting. (From the 
Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture for 1915.) 




Fig. 3. — Map of the United States, showing the dbstributlou and approximate acreage of 
peach trees of nonbearing age, based on the Thirteenth Census. Each dot represents 
500 acres. (From the Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture for 1915.) 



BULLETIIT 806, U. S. DEPAETMEI7T OF AGKICULTURE. 



Table I. — Estimated production of peaches in, the United States for the 21-i/ear 
period, 1S90 to 1919, inclusive. • 

[Data in thousands of bushels (000 omitted). The figures for the years 1809 and 1909 are Census estimates. 
The figures for other years are interpretations of tlie percentage estimates by the Bureau of Crop l^sti- 
mates, the Census figures being used as a basis.] 



Group and State. 


1809 

(Cen- 
sus). 


1900 


1901 


1902 


1903 


1904 


1905 


1900 


1907 


1008 


North Atlantic States: 


2 

C 

1 

28 

6 

62 

487 

621 

143 


2 

30 

1 

140 

8 

140 

1,500 

1,900 

1,400 


2 

8 

1 

100 

13 

280 

850 

1,200 

1,700 


2 

50 

1 

150 

14 

230 

550 

1,300 

1,350 


2 

20 

1 

35 

2 

50 

670 

350 

900 


2 

40 

1 

70 

5 

110 

675 

700 

700 


2 

35 

1 

120 

12 

240 

1,650 

1, 000 

1, 500 


2 

30 

1 

90 

13 

200 

920 

1,000 

1,000 


2 

20 

1 

25 

5 

60 

400 

4,50 

eOO 


2 




45 




1 


Massachusetts 


100 
12 




220 




1,470 




800 




1,500 






Total 


1,336 


5, 121 


4,154 


3,647 


2,030 


2, 303 


4,560 


3,2.^6 


l,.5.->3 


4,150 






South Atlantic States: 


10 
172 
357 

IS 
374 
129 
260 

92 


250 
1,900 
1,900 

700 
1,550 

800 
5,000 

190 


170 
1,300 
1,.350 

800 
1,]50 

650 
3,310 

160 


185 
1,140 

850 

250 
1,050 

600 
3,370 

190 


45 
600 
800 
180 

1,100 
750 

2,100 
110 


135 
950 

850 

700 
1,350 

700 
5,000 

180 


15 

600 
950 
330 

1,200 
650 

3,025 
IJO 


100 
850 
800 
500 

1,100 
700 

3,720 
150 


35 
250 
300 
150 
550 
170 
1,125 
80 


100 




750 




900 


West Virginia 


650 




1,409 


South Carolina 


1,100 




5,020 




160 






Total 


1,412 il2,2':0 


8,920 


7, 635 


5,685 


9,865 


6,910 


7,920 


2,660 


10,080 






North-Central States east of 
the IMississippi River: 
Ohio 


241 
69 
67 

340 


1.900 

'900 

1,600 

2,200 


3,800 
1,600 
2, 100 
2,250 


1,100 
ISO 
300 

2,200 


1,050 
400 
450 

1,500 


1,900 
630 
700 

1,000 


2,000 

1,000 

750 

2,450 


1,100 

820 

2,150 

1,400 


680 
450 
770 
700 


2,050 




1,190 


Illinois 


1,750 




1,800 




























Total 


717 


6, GOO 


9,750 


3,780 


3,400 


4,230 


6, 200 


5, 470 


2,600 


6,790 






North-Central States vrest of 
the Jlississippi River: 
























5 
61 


IGO 
2,250 


180 
2,700 


50 
1, 200 


180 

850 


70 
2,500 


30 
650 


300 
4,000 


100 
500 


170 




2,200 


North Dakota 


























Nebraska 


9 

138 


80 
650 


120 
700 


60 
350 


30 
250 


200 
650 


30 
180 


180 
950 


170 
SO 


150 




650 






Total 


213 


3,170 


3,700 


1,060 


1,310 


3,420 


890 


5, 430 


800 


3,170 






South-Central States: 


35 
78 
185 
252 
154 
1,400 
305 
334 


2,100 

1,900 
2,300 
2,300 

520 
2,900 

780 
1,600 


2,500 
1,800 
1,850 
1,700 

410 
1,5C0 

710 
1, .550 


500 
1,100 
1,850 
1,650 

450 
2,200 
1,000 
2, 200 


6.50 

900 

1,250 

1, 150 

300 

1,600 

700 

500 


1,700 

1,450 
2,600 
2,100 

560 
1,850 

500 
2,500 


1,570 
670 
870 
900 
4S0 

2,600 
740 

2,200 


1,700 
2,400 
2,100 
1, 500 
450 
1,900 
1,200 
2,300 


550 
450 
650 
600 
250 

1,700 
800 

2,400 


1,670 




1,700 




2,150 




1,650 




510 


Texas 


2,300 


Oklahoma 


830 


Arkansas 


2,700 






Total 


2,743 


14,400 


12, 080 


10,9.50 


7,050 


13, 260 


10, 0."0 


13,550 


7, 400 


13,510 






Far Western States: 














































47 
76 
38 
35 
3 

18 

81 

101 

8,563 


ISO 

130 

36 

230 

1 

100 

190 

240 

6,750 


250 

80 

39 

220 

6 

30 

200 

180 

6,8:36 


390 

130 

44 

190 

5 

60 

170 

240 

8,930 


350 

90 

50 

220 

5 

60 

210 

240 

8,150 


580 

80 

23 

250 

4 

90 

250 

290 

6,425 


150 
100 
46 
160 
3 

40 

190 

220 

7,135 


800 
120 
32 
260 
6 
60 
200 
190 
6,810 


40 
10 

30 

90 

4 

50 

240 

250 

6,900 


360 




100 


Arizona 

Utah 


48 
190 


Nevada 


2 




80 




270 




250 


Calilomia 


9,146 






Total 


9,012 


7,857 


7,841 


10, 159 


9,375 


7,992 


8,044 


8,478 


7,614 


10, 446 


United States (grand 
total) 


15, 433 


49,438 


46,445 


37,831 


28,850 


41,070 


36,634 


44, 104 


22, 527 


48,146 







peaches: PRODUCTION' ESTIMATES, ETC. 5 

Table I. — Esthiiatcd production of peaches in the United States for the 21-year 
period, 1899 to 1919, inclusive — Continued. 



Group and State. 


1909 
(Cen- 
sus). 


1910 


1911 


1912 


1913 


1914 


1915 


1916 


1917 


lOlS 


1919 


North Atlantic States: 


2 

23 

2 

92 

18 

270 

1,736 

441 

1,024 






















New Ilampslure. . . 


56 






44 


3 


58 


24 


46 




43 








Massachusetts 

Rhode Island 


68 

18 

291 

1,762 

810 

1,533 


97 

22 

249 

1,536 

410 

1,096 


51 

16 

128 

1,400 
638 
660 


105 
29 
263 
1,742 
483 
922 


31 

14 

142 

530 

1,140 

1,541 


152 
29 

335 
2,106 
1,275 
2,044 


66 
14 

134 
1,238 

689 
1,069 


144 




136 


Connecticut 


300 
4,823 

9<.'0 
1,848 


"""766' 
832 
720 


186 
1,648 


New Jersey 

Pennsylvania 


818 
1,046 


Total 


3,608 


4,538 


3,440 


2,893 


3,588 


3,401 


5,999 


3, 234 


8,241 


2,252 


3,877 




South Allautie States: 


17 
325 
243 
329 

1,344 
643 

2,555 
115 


810 
1,080 
1,075 

598 
1,955 
1,204 
5,395 

178 


249 
492 
318 
230 
437 
649 
2, 1-J5 
126 


521 

672 
1,0.58 

7SS 
2,093 
1,020 
6,175 

190 


312 fiOS 


842 
1,218 
1,358 
1,104 
1,955 

864 
5,330 

177 


346 
600 
6C0 
520 
807 
515 
3,510 
119 


324 

i,a3s 

928 

900 

1,978 

1,0.30 

3,668 


136 
235 
510 
6S0 

1, 150 
908 

6,092 


277 


Maryland 


480 
312 
132 
598 
405 
1,950 
112 


1,032 
911 

886 
1,863 
1,166 
5, 785 

188 


731 




92S 


West Virginia 

North Carolina 

South Carolina 


928 

713 

466 

.5,895 


Florida 










Total 


5,571 


12, 295 


4,646 


12,517 


4,301 


12,4.39 


12,938 


7,197 


9,866 


9,801 


^,938 






North-Central States 
c:ist of the Missis- 
sippi River: 
Ohio 


1,036 
1,174 
1,223 
1,687 

1 


1,2.39 
703 
140 

1,215 


1,7.35 
1,147 
2,310 
2,228 


1,055 

185 

82 

700 


931 
1,276 
1,998 
1,539 


1,653 
1,128 
1,755 
1,247 


2,448 
648 
874 

2, 300 


1,350 
888 
780 

2,010 


341 
518 
401 
744 


174 
"85' 


723 


Indiana.. 


150 




7C0 




480 


Wisconsin 


























Total 


5,121 


3,297 


7,420 


2,022 


6,744 


5,783 


6,330 


5,028 


2, 064 


239 


2 148 






North-Central States 
west of the Missis- 
sippi River: 


1 

23 
1,485 






















Iowa 


16 
1,440 


240 
2,700 


24 
900 


632 
4,320 


472 
3,780 


112 
3,300 


64 
1,050 






3 




728 




828 


North Dakota 




South Dakota 
























N ebraska. 


110 
25 


150 
2,432 


36 
851 


240 
2,016 


210 
875 


192 
1,760 


120 
2,442 


30 

150 








Kansas 






80 










Total 


1,544 


4,038 


3,827 


3,180 


6,037 


6,204 


5,974 


1,294 


728 




911 






South-Central States: 
Kentucky 


1,623 

1,579 

1,417 

1,157 

291 

730 

358 

1,902 


770 
1,440 
1,980 
1,340 

488 
3,400 
1,460 
2,000 


770 
S60 
840 
460 
190 

1,204 
656 

2,346 


1,210 
2,P20 
2,700 
1,800 
693 
4,140 
2,121 
4, 524 


1,430 
1, 140 
1,140 
1,020 

460 
2,107 

860 
3,120 


1,9S0 
2,640 
2,310 
1,440 
356 
1,196 
'220 
3,180 


1,320 

2,460 
2,640 
1,510 
456 
4, 081 
2,408 
6,940 


880 
900 

1,110 
400 
5S7 

2, S()0 

2.;o 

759 


1,100 

595 

1,281 


110 
2, 440 


726 


Tennessee.. 


978 


Alabama 


1 678 


MississippL 










Texas 


1,728 

798 

1,824 


2,333 

167 
217 


2 760 


Oklahoma 


1,007 


Arkansn.'? 


3,039 




Total 


9,057 


12,878 


6,826 


20, 068 


11,277 


13,322 


20, 845 


7,717 


7, .326 


6,100 


10, 788 






Far Western States: 












































Colorado 


692 

32 

50 

143 

3 

19 

84 

179 

9,267 


346 

50 

42 

195 

2 

60 

348 

317 

9,765 


363 
86 
51 

208 
10 
81 

320 

190 
7,412 


1,035 

84 

54 

323 

10 

112 

445 

292 

9,308 


360 

52 

57 

284 

8 

92 

446 

311 

7,150 


1,025 

106 

60 

380 

9 

120 

486 

387 

10,387 


650 

154 

60 

212 

7 

162 

666 

432 

9,768 


405 

40 

56 

84 

1 

25 

415 

276 

11,733 


1,096 
124 


959 
34 


902 


New Mexico 


122 


Utah 


1,365 


1,050 


1,600 






Idaho 


211 

1,747 

273 

15, 72^1 


51 

575 

93 

12, 959 


222 


Washington 

Oregon 


1,899 
514 




17,625 






Total 


10,469 


11,125 


8,721 


11,663 


8,760 


12,900 


12,011 


13,035 


20, 540 


15,721 


22,784 






United States 
(grand total) . . 


35,470 


48, 171 


34, 880 


52,343 


.39,707 


,54, 109 


64,097 


37, .505 


48,765 


34,133 


50,446 



BULLETIN 806, U. S. DEPARTMEXT OF AGEICULT.UKE. 



There is rarely a season in "which the crop is not materially re- 
duced in some of the important peach-producing regions by the oc- 
currence of adverse conditions of some kind, the effect upon the total 
crop of the country depending obviously upon the importance of the 
regions affected and the severity of the conditions. On the other 
hand, occasional seasons occur when conditions are favorable in all or 
nearly all of the important commercial districts, and the result is an 
extremely large crop, as in 1915, and correspondingly low prices for 
much of the fruit. 

The principal regions from which peaches were shipped in the 
fresh state in 1914 are presented on the map shown as figure 3 in De- 

yjsfiPs jSocs-zy^^^ ^ /o ys- ^-o es 3o 3S -i^o -^^ ^o ss eo es 



/399 
/&00 
/30/ 
/30P 
/303 
/30-^ 
/30S 

/3oe 
/3o;^ 

/303 

/303 

/3/0 

/3// 

/3/^ 

/3/3 

/3/^ 

/3/^ 

/3/ff 

/^/7 


/s,ooo,ooo 

■¥■3,000,000 

■^e; OOO, OOO 

3 S, OOO, OOO 
23, OOO, OOO 
-^Z, OOO, OOO 

3;^ooo,ooo 

■¥^,000,000 
^3, OOO, OOO 
^<3, OOO, OOO 
3^,000,000 
^f>3, OOO, OOO 
33,000,000 
32,00c} OOO 

■^0,000,000 
^-^000,000 
e^ 000, 000 

3S, 000,000 
-^3, OOQOOO 


»» 


_ 




















^i^ 




!■■■■[* 




■OH 


"*" 




1 


BUHIBq 


ami 


IklHWBN 




wn 


■BE 


I 


■m^m 


"""j 


DUHHM 








1 




""* 


^ 


""'"T" 




^^ 




bbud 




1 


"*"' 


■JIdUU- 




H 


1 














1 


Lim 


1 






3Zj 




"" 








1 




■"— 




^H 











"" 










iHP<l 






""" 




tan 


Ztl 






OH 












"t" 




""" 


■H 




^H 


ct;^ 




r"" 


""" 




■■■ 


■» 


1 


^ 


*""■ 




aw 


BB 


warn 










mIbbi 


□ 




t^ 



Fig. 4. — Diagram showing the annual farm production of peaches (in hushels) in the 
United States for the lO-year period from 1899 to 1017. inclusive. The farm pro- 
duction in 1918 was 34,000,000 bushels; in 1919 (September estimates), 50,000,000 
bushels. The commercial crop, in distinction from the farm production, for each 
of the pa.'^t three years was as follows : In 1917, 29.000,000 bushels ; in 1918, 21,- 
000,000 bushels; in 1919 (September estimates), 29.000,000 bushels. 

partment Bulletin ^o. 298, entitled " Peach Supply and Distribution 
in 1914." On this map the number of carloads froni each region and 
the general period during which the fruit from different regions was 
being shipped are shown. 

The peach season in each State and its relation in point of time 
to that of other States is clearly shown in figure 5. The height of 
the peach season in each State named in figure 5, with the exception 
of Florida and California, is during the Elberta period, that variety 
comprising a large proportion of the commercial crop in most States. 
In some regions it is ^practically the only variety shipped in quantity. 

The estimated average annual peach production by States for the 
5-year period, 1912 to 1916, inclusive, is shown in figure G. It will 



peaches: production estimates, etc. 7 

be noted that the production of " all other States " is 275.000 bushels 
and that the combined production of the five States named accounts 
for all except 4,000 bushels of that quantity. 



MAY 



%JU/^£ 



^L OR/DA 



OULY 



SOUTH CAROLINA 



AUGUST 



SEPTEMBER 



CAUFORNfA 



NORTH CAROLINA 



c 



GEORGIA 



CI 



Tex AS 



^ISS/5SIPPl \ 



j ALABAMA 



EZ 



LOUISIANA 



r~" 



ARKANSAS 



OKLAHOMA 



NEW MEXICO 



c 



WEST VIR GINIA 



OCTOBER 



I TENNESSEE \ 



c 



OREGON 



COLORADO 



c 



VmCINfA 



WASHINGTON 



\_ I NDIANA 

r 



KENTUCKY 



/^£W JERSEY 



MISSOURI 



DELA WARE 



/L L INOI.S 



MARYLAND 



OHIO 



MICHIGAN 






CONNECTICUT 



IDAHO 



\ PENN SYLVANIA 

r- I I 

/V£"*V YORK 



UTAH 



IE 



Fig. 5. Diagram showing the peaeh-shlpping season in each of the principal peach- 
luoducing States. (From Deijartment BuUetin 298.) 

The estimates on Avhich the averages given in figure 6 are based 
represent the total crop rather than the commercial portion. This is 
illustrated in the estimates given for New York, in which there are 



8 



BULLETIIT 806, U. S. DEPAETMEISTT OF AGEICXJLTURE. 



large commercial interests, and in Kansas, in which the commercial 
interests are almost negligible. Assuming that tliese estimates are 
accurately proportioned, the large number of small home orchards in 
Kansas possessed in the aggregate during the 5-year period repre- 
sented in figure 6 a larger producing capacity than the commercial 
orchards in New York. Other similar examples might be pointed out. 
The shipment of fresh fruit in 1914 from the principal peach- 
producing States is shown graphically in figure 7. This diagram, 




/03, OOO S(/. 

/cr^ OOO i3i/. 
/^■S, OOO ^i/. . 
^O/, OOO sc/. 
'\e^7,OOOBU 

\Be/,ooo i9u \ 

^P'^O, OOO 3i/. 
\fZ^,OOOSC/. 

\ ^/o, ooo au 

^^>e, ooo 3u 
^ess.ooo^u 

Xese.ooo /3U 

Ysoo.ooo Si/. 

\ao7,oco au \ 
\ees,oooau. 

}S'<!^000 B(y. 

\s60,ooo ae/.\ 
[y, OSS, oooau 

\/, / 63,000 a(/. ' 

',340,000 au. , 
U^-?7; ooosu > 
XA^e'^, ooo au ' 
\/, '^oa, ooo au 
\/,4:^.9, ooo au 
/, -^ff/, ooo su 
XA^aaiOooau 
]/, S7/, ooo au 
/,.9&B,ooo au 



/.99B j poo BU 

"Xs, e 7-0, 000/5U ^ 

"li?. ayy, oo o au ^ 

\3,so3.o doau 

"~ \4,^^0,OOOBi/. 



■9, 6SS, ooo BO. 



Fig. 6. — Diagram showins tlic estimated annual average prodnctiou of peaches in the 
principal peach-producing States, for the u-year period from 1912 to 191G, inclusive. 
The production of five of the States not separately shown in the diagram, hut in- 
cluded under " All other," was as follows : New Mexico, 87,000 ; Marsachusetts, 81,000 ; 
Arizona, 57,000 ; New Hampshire, 26,000 ; Rhode Island, 20,000. 

however, does not show the relative commercial interests so far as 
California is concerned (see Table I and figure 6 for relative total 
production), since a large proportion of the crop in that State is 
used for drying and canning, and hence is not reported in fresh- fruit 
shipments. Furthermore, the shipments shown in figure 7 are for a 
single season, and the relative position of many of the States might 
be markedly different in other seasons, depending largely on the occur- 
rence in different regions of climatic and other conditions that are 
favorable or otherwise to the peach crop. 



peaches: production estimates, etc. 9 

OUTSTANDING FEATURES OF THE PEACH INDUSTRY. 

A few features of the peach industry need special mention in the 
present connection. From the variety standpoint, the preponder- 
ance of the Elberta in most of the producing centers and the selec- 
tion of special varieties for drying and for canning in California are 
of interest. 

The gradual change from decade to decade in the geography of 
peach growing may also be noted. In certain regions where 20 

O SQO rOOO. /SOO 2000 2.SOO 3000 3S00 4000 4-S60 SOOO CARS 




G£ORGI/^ 



COLOf^ADO 
W£ST V/^gilNfA 
/^£W J£R5&Y 
UTAH 
MAfiYLANQ> 
ARf<Ar/SAS 
P£/V/VSyL WAWA 
amsm D£LA\iVAR£ 
^M^ IDAHO 
■BB COAfUECT/CUT 
W^m TEXAS 

mm /LL/A/o/s 

■■ OftEGOAf 

mm AIEW YORK 

^ M/SSOURI 

Ea NORTH CAROLINA 

a ALABAMA 

m NEW MEXICO 

a KENTUCKY 

B TENNESSEE 

a OKLAHOMA 

■ SOUTH CAROLINA 

a VIRGINIA 



Fig. 7. — Relative bulk of peach shipments in car lots from the principal peach-producing 
States in 1S14. (.From Department Bulletin 208.) 

years ago there was a commercial orchard on nearly every farm, 
few peaches, or even none, are grown for shipping at the present 
time. In one or two other regions large quantities of peaches have 
been produced in recent years on trees interplanted in apple orchards. 
As the apple trees developed and required more space the peach 
trees have been removed. Thus the production of peaches is de- 
creasing in these regions, and in the near future the industry doubt- 
less will disappear. Such changes have characterized the peach 
industry in a marked degree. 
139075°— Bull. 806—19 2 



10 BULLETIN" 806, T. S. DEPAETIVIEI^T OF AGRICULTURE. 

IMPORTANT COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS AND VARIETIES, 
BY STATES. 

NEW ENGLAND STATES. 

MAINE. 

Distribution. — It is substaiitially true that peaches are not grown 
in Maine. This is primarily on account of the low winter tempera- 
tures that normally occur. The shortness of the growing season is 
also a factor. 

A very few small orchards have been planted in York County, in 
the southern part of the State, one at least in Lincoln County, and 
an occasional tree or two maj^ be found in some parts of Cumberland, 
Oxford, and possibly other counties. The crop, however, is very 
uncertain. 

Varieties. — There is no generally recognized list of varieties for 
this part of the country. The Triumph, Greensboro, Carman, Cham- 
pion, Belle, Crosby, and possibly others have been planted. The 
New York Agricultural Experiment Station in Circular 15 (revised) 
names the Crosby, Chili, Elberta, Gold Drop, and Stevens as the 
five varieties most hardy in wood of those grown in Xew York. 
Four of these varieties, with the Triumph substituted for Elberta, 
are also given ac the hardiest in bud. While hardiness in tree and 
bud is an essential characteristic of a variety for the northern ex- 
tremes of culture, some of the best experience available indicates 
that varieties later than the Belle are not likely to mature in the 
average season, and even varieties ripening with the Belle may some- 
times fail to mature because of the shortness of the season. 

NEW HAMFSHIRE. 

Distrihution. — Small coramercial peach interests have been de- 
veloped in a few localities in the southern and southeastern parts of 
New Hampshire. These interests center largely about Wilton in Hills- 
borough County, about Derry in the southern part of Eockingham 
County, and about Stratham and Greenland in the eastern part of 
that county. A feAv trees are more or less widely distributed in other 
sections of the southern part of the State, but mostly in gardens and 
small home plantings. 

Tarkties. — The A^arieties most commonly planted are the Greens- 
l>oro, Carman, Mountain Rose, Champion, Early Crawford, Foster, 
Belle, Elberta, Late Crawford, and Crosby. 



Distrihution. — Peaches are not planted commercially in Vermont. 
A few trees may be found in the southeastern part of Windham 
County about Brattleboro, and an occasional tree is growing in other 



peaches: PEODUcTioisr estimates, etc. 11 

jjarts of that count}', as weii as about Isle La Motte in Grand Isle 
Count}'. This location is on an island in Lake Champlain. 

Varieties. — No definite suggestions concerning varieties are offered 
aside from the obvious fact that only the hardiest sorts should be 
selected,^ and even these are likely to prove very uncertain as to crop 
production. 

MASSACHUSETTS. 

Distrihutian. — Peaches are somewhat widely distributed in ]\Iassa- 
chusetts, except perhaps in the western part of the State. The prin- 
cipal areas of commercial production are within the more important 
apple-growing districts. However, not many peaches are shipped 
long distances even from the larger orchards, local markets absorb- 
ing most of the fruit. The principal localities which admit of 
definite designation as peach-producing centers are enumerated below. 

The largest production is probably in the central part of the State in 
Worcester County, Warren in the southwestern part of the county, 
Grafton in the southeastern, and Bolton in the east-central part being 
commmiity centers of some prominence. The Bolton section is 
practically a part of the Littleton and Marlboro sections- in the 
western part of INIiddlesex County, iii which peaches are locally im- 
portant. They are also grown more or less at other points in this 
county and in Essex County, the northeasternmost county of the 
State, centering in a general way in the locality of Haverhill and 
West Newbury. Small orchards of local importance are found at 
various points in all the other counties in the eastern and south- 
eastern parts of the State. Farther west, Wilbraham in Hampden 
County and Amherst in Hampshire County, with various other local 
points, may also be included in the present inventory of small pro- 
ducing centers. In some sections peaches were formerly interplanted 
in apple orchards, but such peach interests have now largely gone 
out as the apple trees have developed. 

Varieties, — ^The Greensboro, Carman, Champion. Belle, and El- 
berta constitute the principal sorts grown. 

KHODK ISLAND. 

Distrilfution. — There are no special centers of peach production 
in Ehode Island, but orchards planted for commercial purposes occur 
more or less widely throughout the State, the larger orchards occur- 
ring in Newport, Providence, Washington, and Bristol Counties, in. 
the order named. , 

1 Concerning the relative hardiness of varieties, the New York AgriciiUural Experiment 
Station (Circular 15, revised* states that the Ave varieties of peaches most hardy la 
wood are the Croshy, Chili, Stevens, Ciold Drop, and Elberta. The Crawfords are con- 
sidered most tender in wood. The five varieties of peaches most hardy in bud are tlie 
Crosby, Chili, Triumph, Gold Drop, and Stevens. The five most tender in bud are the 
Early Crawford, Late Crawford, Chairs, Reeves, and Elberta. 



12 BULLETIN 806, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

Varieties. — The varieties grown are substantially the same as those 
planted in Connecticut and Massachusetts. 

CONNECTICUT. 

Distrihiition. — Peach growing is more or less widely distributed 
in most parts of Connecticut, except in Litchfield County, in the 
extreme northwestern part of the State, where few peaches are 
grown. The district of particular importance commercially, how- 
ever, is the central part of the State, in the Connecticut River valley 
from about the region of Hartford southward and including areas 
in most parts of New Haven County. Representative towns in this 
district may be named, as follows: Farmington, Glastonbury, and 
Southington, in Hartford County ; Durham and Middleficld, in Mid- 
dlesex County; Cheshire, Guilford, Milford, Oxford, and Walling- 
ford, in New Ha^'en County; and Greenwich, Norwalk, and other 
towns in the southern part of Fairfield County adjacent to the shore 
of Long Island Sound. In New Haven County the towns of Guil- 
ford and Milford, above named, adjoin the Sound. Peaches are also 
grown more or less in other towns similarh' located between Green- 
wich and Guilford. 

Varieties. — Many growers in Connecticut select varieties with a 
view to marketing peaches during as long a period as possible. The 
principal sorts planted are the Greensboro, Waddell, Carman, Hiley, 
Champion, Belle, Early Crawford, Hale (J. H.), Elberta, Frances, 
Stump, Late Crawford, Fox, Stevens, Iron Mountain, and Salwey. 

MIDDLE ATLANTIC STATES. 

NEW YOEK. 

Distribution. — Though New York is one of the large peach- 
producing States, the districts in which the principal interests are 
located are more clearly defined than in many other States. By far 
the largest output is from the Lake Ontario shore district from 
Oswego County westward to and including Niagara County. This 
district consists at most points of a narrow strip only a few miles 
wide, where the influence of the lake so modifies the climatic con- 
ditions at certain periods as to make them especially favorable for 
peach growing. At a few points this favored belt extends into the 
northern parts of the second tier of counties, as, for instance, in 
Livingston County, in which some peaches are produced. This is 
by far the largest commercial peach district in the State. Another 
district is that immediately surrounding the " finger lakes," in 
central-western New York, where at various points peaches are grown 
in limited quantities. A third district of some importance is in the 
Hudson River valley and comprises locations along the river in 



peaches: production estimates, etc, 13 

Orange County and in the southern parts of Dutchess and Ulster 
Counties. Small quantities of peaches are also grown along the Lake 
Erie shore, in Erie and Chautauqua Counties, but the interests there, 
as in many other sections where home orchards occur, are relatively 
unimportant as compared with those along the shore of Lake 
Ontario. 

Varieties. — The Carman, Champion, Belle, Early Crawford, El- 
berta, Late Crawford, Stevens, and Salwey are the principal varie- 
ties grown. A very large proportion of the product consists of the 
Elberta variety, it being estimated to comprise 80 per cent of the crop 
in some localities. There is no close second to the Elberta variety in 
the peach industry of the State. 

NEW JERSET. 

D'istrihution. — Peach growing has long been a prominent com- 
mercial enterprise in New Jersey. Orchards are widely distributed 
in most parts of the State, but the commercial interests are more or 
less localized about certain centers. The centers of principal produc- 
tion have changed to some extent because of the incursions of peach 
yellows, the ravages of the San Jose scale, and for other reasons, but 
at present the larger regions commercially important are the follow- 
ing : Hunterdon County, in the locality of Lebanon and New German- 
town ; Monmouth County, about Freehold and Middletown ; Burling- 
ton County, centering about Moorestown and Burlington; Gloucester 
County, about Glassboro; Atlantic County, in the vicinity of Ham- 
monton ; and Cumberland County, with Vineland as a prominent cen- 
ter of production. Except Hunterdon and Monmouth, the counties 
named above are located in the southern half of the State. While 
peaches are widely gi'own outside the centers mentioned, the counties 
named indicate the general distribution of the larger interests. 

Varieties. — The principal varieties planted at present comprise the 
following: Greensboro, Arp, Carman, Lola, St. John, Hiley, Cham- 
pion, Belle, Elberta, Frances, Fox, Iron Mountain, and Krummel. 
While few orchards, and perhaps none, contain all of these varieties, 
the list is made vip of those which are variously planted in the prin- 
cipal peach sections. In an earlier day the Mountain Rose, Early 
Crawford, and Reeves were leading commercial sorts, but these are 
of relatively little importance in New Jersey at the present time. 

PENNSYLVANIA. 

Dist'i^hution. —Veaches are widely distributed in most parts of 
Pennsylvania, and the large number of good-sized industrial towns 
and cities in that State furnish local markets for much fruit. Though 
from many orchards the fruit is shipped in car lots to distant mar- 



14 BULLETIN 806, IT. g, DEPARTMEKT OF AGRICULTURE. 

kets, tlie community interests as a rule are comparatively small, 
except in a few districts. Probably the most important producing 
section at present is the southeastern quarter of Franklin County, in 
which are located several rather large shipping points. This forms a 
part of the Cumberland \^alley — a district Avhich, as a whole, has 
produced many peaches in the past and doubtless is still the most im- 
portant peach district in the State. Besides Franklin County, Cum- 
berland, Perry, and Juniata Counties belong in this valley district. 
Adams and York Counties, located between Franklin and Cumberland 
Counties and the Susquehanna River, also contain peach orchards of 
commercial rating; likewise Xorthampton and Lehigh Counties, in the 
east-central part of the State. A third district of considerable im- 
portance is the lake shore region of Erie County, in the extreme 
northwestern part of the State. 

Varieties. — Carman, Champion, Belle, Ede, Elberta, Fox, Late 
Crawford, Chairs, Iron Mountain, Geary, Smock, and Salwey are the 
principal varieties. Few, if any, orchards contain all of these varie- 
ties, though the growers, especially those in the Cumberland Valley 
and adjacent sections, usuallj' aim to plant a considerable number of 
varieties, with a view to shipping continuously over a long period. 

EAST NORTH-CENTRAL STATES. 
OHIO. 

Distmnifion. — Peach growing for home use is more or less uni- 
versal throughout Ohio, but the areas of commercial production are 
fairly definite. In its commercial aspects, Ottawa County, with its 
peninsulas and adjacent islands bordering Lake Erie near its western 
extremity, is far in the lead of any other county; but in this same 
general lake-shore district there are several other peach-growing 
counties, including Lucas, Sandusk}', Lorain, Lake, and Ashtabula. 

Peaches are grown in commercial quantities in some of the coun- 
ties in the southeastern part of the State, especially along the Ohio 
River. Lawrence, Meigs, and Athens Counties are mentioned as 
representative sections of this district. Orchards of some commer- 
cial standing also are found in Coshocton and Muskingum Counties, 
midway between the Ohio River and the geographical center of the 
State. 

Varieties. — ^^The Carman, Xew Prolific, Elberta, Lemon Free, 
Smock, and Salwey are the varieties most largely 'produced. 



Distrihution. — Though very generally distributed throughout most 
of Indiana, the commercial j^roduction of peaches is principally in 
four districts, three of which are in the southern part of the State. 



peaches: production estimates, etc. 15 

These districts are thus defined: (1) About the junction of the White 
and Wabash Eivers in Knox and Gibson Counties: (2) in the hilly 
section in the south-central part of the State, principally in Orange 
and Lawrence Counties and adjacent parts of the adjoining counties, 
including Brown, Monroe, Jackson, Washington, and Martin; (3) 
in most of the counties bordering the Ohio River: and (4) in the 
northern part of the State bordering Lake Michigan and including 
parts of Porter and Laporte Counties. 

Vmneties. — The bulk of the crop consists of the Elbeita variety, 
with the Carman, Champion, and small quantities of a few others as 
secondary sorts. 

ILLINOIS. 

Distrihution. — Commercial peach growing in Illinois is confined to 
the southern third of the State, with only such exceptions as are 
practically negligible. Even in this area the centers of production 
are rather restricted. In the average season Union County, in the 
extreme southern part of the State, probably lead^ in production, 
but interests of commercial importance are found elsewhere, espe- 
cially in Johnson, Jackson, Marion, Clay, and Richland Counties. 
Peach trees are planted in considerable numbers for home use 
throughout practically the whole State. 

Yai'ieties. — The Elberta is loughly estimated by some to comprise 
as high as 90 per cent of the trees planted in the commercial orchards. 
A few Carman. Mountain Rose, Ede, Heath, and some others occur. 
The Hale (J. H.) has been planted in some of the younger orchards. 

MICHIGAN. 

Distrihutwn. — Peach growing in Michigan is an extensive indus- 
try. The area in which it has been developed is more clearly defined 
than in many other States. It borders Lake Michigan in a narrow 
belt which includes Berrien County, the soutliAvesternmost county 
of the State, and extends thence to Leelanau County (which lies 
between Grand Traverse Bay and the lake) on the north. It is 
largely through the ameliorating influence of Lake Michigan upon 
climatic conditions in the areas adjacent to it that the development 
there of a peach-growing industry has been made possible. As the 
lake's influence extends inland but a short distance, the peach belt 
is only a very few miles wide at most points. In the Grand Traverse 
region, about the bay of that name, peaches are grown to some ex- 
tent, and the belt extends across Ottawa County into Kent County 
in the second tier from the lake, though at most points its width 
covers only a portion of the first tier of counties bordering the lake. 
Peaches a4*e also produced in some other sections of the State, as, for 



16 BULLETIN 806, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

instance, in Oakland County, in the southeastern part, and in Huron 
County, in the east-central part. The latter county forms a penin- 
sula between Saginaw Bay and Lake Huron, and thus is bordered 
by large bodies of water except on the south. However, the com- 
mercial peach interests outside the belt above defined are relatively 
small. 

Varieties. — While a considerable number of varieties are grown, 
the bulk of the commercial crop is made up of a comparatively few 
sort's, the principal ones being the following: Engle {^Engle's Mam- 
moth)^ Kalamazoo, New Prolific, Elberta, Gold Drop, Smock, and 
Salwey. In the northern part of the Lake Michigan belt two early 
sorts, the Triumph and St. John, are grown to a limited extent, while 
the late varieties, such as the Smock and Salwey, are not so much 
grown as farther south in the State. 

WISCONSIN. 

Peaches are not grown in Wisconsin except possibly here and 
there a tree in the southern part of the State. The winter conditions, 
especially as to temperature, are too severe for successful peach 
culture. 

WEST NORTH-CENTRAL STATES. 

MINNESOTA. 

Distribution. — Peach growing from a practical standpoint may be 
said not to exist in Minnesota. The Thirteenth Census reported only 
1,571 trees of bearing age for the entire State. Of these, 334 (the 
largest number in any one county) were in Hennepin County. This 
county was also reported to have the largest number of bearing trees 
of both apples and plums. 

Varieties. — No recommendations as to varieties can be made. 



Distribution. — Peach growing is relatively unimportant in Iowa. 
The few peaches that are produced are grown very largely in the 
southern third of the State — that is, south of the latitude of Des 
Moines. In this area small plantings are more or less widely dis- 
tributed. Possibly the conditions in the extreme southeastern 
counties and in those in the southwest having loess soils are more 
favorable for peaches than in other parts of the State. Formerly 
peach trees were interplanted in some of the apple orchards in Fre- 
mont County, possibly also in some other sections, but as the apple 
trees have developed the peach trees have been removed. 

Varieties. — The Triumph, Greensboro, Carman, and Elberta occur 
perhaps as frequently as any varieties. Seedlings are not uncommon 
in some sections where budded varieties have proved very uncertain. 



peaches: PKODUCTIO:tT ESTIMATES, ETC. 17 

MISSOUEI. 

Distribution. — The wide distribution of peach trees throughout 
Missouri is indicated on the map shown as figure 2. It is also shown 
by the fact that in 1910, according to the Thirteenth Census, 30 per 
cent of the counties each contained 50,000 or more trees of bearing 
age, while about 45 per cent of the counties contained 40,000 or more 
trees old enough to bear fruit. In most of these counties, however, 
the trees are in home or small local orchards which have little or no 
commercial importance. Commercial production is confined very 
largely to the Ozark region along the lines of the St. Louis & San 
Francisco and the Kansas City Southern Railroads, the principal 
commercial peach-producing counties being Oregon, Howell, Greene, 
Lawrence, and Newton. Interests of limited commercial extent also 
are found at various points along the Missoiu'i Eiver, but principally 
in St. Louis County in the vicinity of the city of St. Louis and in 
Jackson County, in which Kansas City is located. 

Varieties. — As in many other large commercial peach-producing 
sections, the Elberta variety comprises the principal part of the crop 
in most orchards. Relatively small quantities of the Carman, Moun- 
tain Rose, Family Favorite, Champion, Belle, Heath, Salwey, and a 
few others occur in some orchards. 

NORTH DAKOTA. 

Practically no peaches are grown in North Dakota. 

SOUTH DAKOTA. 

No peaches are grown in South Dakota except a very few in the 
Black Hills district, in the southwestern part of the State. Even 
there they are a negligible factor. No recommendation as to varieties 
is practicable.. 

NEBRASKA. 

Distribution. — Peach growing in Nebraska is unimportant com- 
mercially. Except in four counties — Cass, Otoe, Nemaha, and Rich- 
ardson — which border the Missouri River south of the Platte River 
in the southeastern corner of the State, peaches are practically 
negligible even in local fruit production. Adverse climatic condi- 
tions, particularly low winter temperatures that kill the fruit buds, 
or even the trees, and frosts that occur during the blossoming period 
constitute the chief limiting factors. 

Varieties. — Little attempt is made to grow other than the hardiest 
sorts. The Alexander, Triumph, Rivers, Champion, Crosby, and 
Chili varieties are among those most commonly planted. 
139075°— Bull. 806—19 3 



18 



BULLETIN 806, U. S. DEPAETMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



Distribution. — For home and local use peaches are planted very 
generally in the eastern half of Kansas. Very few are grown in the 
western part of the State. There are a few commercial orchards, 
located principally in the extreme northeastern corner of the State, 
especially in Doniphan County, and at a few points along the 
Arkansas River in Reno, Sedgwick, Sumner, and Cowley Counties. 
Isolated orchards of local importance are also found in a few coun- 
ties in other parts of the State. 

Varieties. — While the Elberta probably predominates, a number 
of the other widely planted varieties are grown, such as the Carman, 
Minnie {Alton), Champion Belle, and Hale (J. H.). 



SOUTH ATLANTIC STATES. 



DELAWABE. 



Distribution. — ^Great changes have taken place in the status of the 
peach industry in Delaware during the last 25 or 80 years. That 
portion of the Chesapeake Peninsula which consists of Delaware 
and the Eastern Shore counties of Maryland early became a famous 
peach-producing region; in fact, it was one of the first regions in 
the country in which peach growing became a great industry. 

Peach growing reached its zenith in New Castle County in the 
late seventies. With the extension southward of peach yellows, the 
center of the industry in Delaware reached the vicinity of Wyom- 
ing, in Kent County, about 1880 to 1885, when probably the produc- 
tion was greater than at any time since. Though considerable 
change has occurred from decade to decade, the central part of Kent 
County contains relatively large interests at present. It is probable 
that they have increased somewhat since the Thirteenth Census was 
compiled. 

The trend of the industry following the period of its greatest 
development is indicated by the census figures presented in Table II. 



Table II. 


— I'ciich trees of 


hearing age in the diff 
and in the entire State. 


crent counties of 


Delaware 




Census of— 




Counties. 


Entire 




New Castle. 


Kent. 


Sussex. 


State. 


1890 


588,119 
37,689 
58, 175 


2,335,740 
824,430 
596, 069 


1,. 597, 764 

1,579,531 

523, 158 


4,521,623 


1900 


2,441,6.50 


1910 


1,177,402 







Since the late seventies New Castle County, the northernmost 
county in the State, has not been prominent for peach growing as 
compared with Kent and Sussex Counties, and, as Table II shows, 



peaches: production estimates, etc. 



19 



there was a decided decrease in the number of bearing trees in Dela- 
ware during the decades included in the tabulation, though from 
1890 to 1900 the decrease in Sussex County was comparatively small. 
This decline in the extent of the industry is probably traceable prin- 
cipally to three causes — ^the destruction of the trees by yellows and 
by the San Jose scale and the competition of the fruit with that pro- 
duced in other regions. During the years when peach growing in 
Delaware was at its height there was comparatively little competition 
in the industry, since extensive planting of peaches had not yec oc- 
curred in many sections. 

The areas about Camden and Wyoming in Kent County, about 
Bridgeville in Sussex County, and about Milford in both these coun- 
ties are among the more important centers of production at present, 
but in a general way peaches are grown more or less throughout 
these two counties in localities within easy hauling distance to ship- 
ping stations. 

Varieties. — Comparatively'^ few varieties make up the bulk of the 
crop. These are principally the Carman, Belle, Reeves, Elberta, 
and Frances, with the Elberta largely predominating. 



MARYLAND. 

Distribution. — For a century and more, peach growing in Mary- 
land has been a prominent agricultural enterprise. This applies 
particularly to certain Eastern Shore counties and to Anne Arundel 
County, on the western shore of Chesapeake Bay. During the late 
eighties and the nineties large interests were developing in Washing- 
ton County in the western part of the State. Probably the zenith 
of peach growing on the Eastern Shore was reached about 1875 to 
1885, coincident with its largest extension in Delaware. Subse- 
quent changes have been not unlike those that have occurred in Dela- 
ware. These changes are suggested by the census figures presented in 
Table III. 

Table III. — Peach trees of bearing age in certain counties in Maryland. 





Counties. 


Census of— 


Caroline. 


Kent. 


Queen 
Anne. 


Wasliing- 
ton. 


1890 


670, 828 
628.284 
175,339 


1,758,005 
484, 249 
190, 594 


1,287,496 
565,640 
119,804 


124,105 


1900 


828,352 


1910 


260,596 







The figures in Table III are self-explanatory. The decline of 
peach growing shown was due to a combination of factors. The 
most potent influences were probably the prevalence of yellows and 



20 BULLETIN 806, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

the competition in the markets with fruit produced in other regions 
where large interests were developed. 

The wide distribution and destructiveness of the San Jose scale 
during the late nineties and the first part of the following decade 
also caused a marked decrease in the number of trees. Even at pres- 
ent the industry is undergoing change, as indicated by the fact that 
since the census of 1910 commercial peach growing in Caroline 
County has practically ceased. Meanwhile, the industry has become 
of increasing importance in some of the more southern counties on 
the Eastern Shore. Of the counties which were early prominent, 
Kent and Queen Anne, both of which border Chesapeake Bay, con- 
tinue to produce considerable quantities of fruit. In addition Talbot, 
Dorchester, Wicomico, and Worcester Counties, all on the Eastern 
Shore, contain peach interests of considerable importance. Wash- 
ington County, in the western part of the State, continues as an im- 
portant factor, and extensive peach interests have been established 
also in Allegany County. 

Varieties. — In western Maryland many of the orchards contain a 
rather long list of varieties planted with a view to supplying the 
markets continuously throughout the entire peach season. Such 
orchards commonly are made up of about the following sorts : Greens- 
boro, Carman, Hiley, Mountain Rose, Champion, Belle, Reeves, 
Elberta, Fox, Late Crawford, Stevens, Smock, Salwey, and Bilyeu. 
In the Eastern Shore orchards relatively few peaches that ripen later 
than the Elberta are grown, though some Late Crawford and Chairs 
are still produced. The Ray and Hale (J. H.), ripening in the same 
general season as the Elberta, are found in some orchards. The 
Carman, Hiley, Champion, and Belle varieties make up the bulk of 
the fruit that ripens before the Elberta. 

VIBGINIA. 

Distribution. — Peaches are widely grown for home use throughout 
nearly all parts of Virginia. Commercial orchards also are found 
at many different places in certain parts of the Piedmont and Val- 
ley regions. The extent of the commercial interests has varied con- 
siderably in the past. In recent years the attention of fruit growers 
in this State has been so largely given to the apple crop that peach 
growing has become a relatively small factor in the fruit industry. 
The principal Piedmont counties, from the standpoint of commercial 
peach enterprises, are Albemarle, Nelson, and Amherst. In the 
Shenandoah Valley, Frederick and Shenandoah Counties doubtless 
lead in importance at present, but Rockingham, Augusta, Alleghany, 
Botetourt, and Roanoke Counties call for mention in this connection. 



PEACHES: PR0DtTCTI01<r ESTIMATES, ETC. 21 

J'aneties. — The varieties principally grown are the widely dis- 
tributed sorts, the most prominent being the Carman, Hiley, Belle, 
Early Crawford. Oldmixon Free, Elberta, Late Crawford, Heath, 
Salwey, and Bilyeii (Comet). 

WEST VIRGINIA. 

Distribution. — While peaches are grown locally more or less in 
many places throughout AVest Virginia, the important commercial 
interests are located chiefly in the counties that make the eastern pan- 
handle region of the State, including Jefferson, Berkeley, Morgan, 
Hampshire, Mineral, Hardy, and Grant Counties. Of these, Mor- 
gan, Hampshire, and Mineral Counties are by far the most impor- 
tant from the standpoint of peach production. In comparison with 
them the peach interests in Jefferson and Berkeley' Counties are 
rather small. The orchards in these two counties are somewhat 
widely distributed, however, being located with reference to the rail- 
roads that cross them in various directions. It is true, likewise, 
that in the other counties named the locations of orchards have been 
determined largely by the transportation facilities, and accordingly 
they are less widely distributed than in Jefferson and Berkeley Coun- 
ties. In Morgan and Mineral Counties peach growing is confined to 
locations within a very few miles of the Potomac Kiver, while in 
Hampshire, Hardy, and Grant Counties, which are traversed by the 
south branch of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, the orchards occupy 
sites on the ridges of the mountains which characterize the topog- 
raphy and parallel with which the railroad is located. 

Peaches are also a commercial crop of limited proportions at points 
in the western part of the State along the Ohio River. Cabell and 
AYood Counties, in which are located, respectively, the cities of Hunt- 
ington and Parkersburg, are relatively imj^ortant in that part of the 
State. 

Varieties. — While much the same varieties are grown in "West Vir- 
ginia as are produced in the peach-growing districts to the south- 
ward, the relative importance of different varieties is not the same 
as it is in most other districts. In most of the orchards in the 
Potomac River valley and adjacent sections the varieties have been 
selected and planted with a view to furnishing a fairly uniform 
ynd continuous supply of fruit throughout a long shipping season. 
It is important, therefore, from the producer's standpoint to have 
the fruit ripening in a uniform sequence in order that the crews may 
be regularly and economically employed. The following varieties are 
the ones largely grown: Carman, Connet {Southern Early) ^ Cham- 
pion, Hiley, Belle, Oldmixon Free, Elberta, Late Crawford, Stevens, 
Beers Smock, Heath, Salwey, and Bilyeu. 



22 BULLETIN 806, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



NORTH CAROLINA. 



Distribution. — The principal commercial peach-producing district 
of Xorth Carolina at present is in what is commonly called the sand- 
hill region. From the peach-growing standpoint this refers pri- 
marily to Moore County, though in adjacent areas in Montgomery 
County, which borders Moore on the west, considerable quantities are 
produced. Candor, in the latter count}^, and Aberdeen, Southern 
Pines, and Eagle Springs are representative shipping stations in 
Moore County. The peach industry is being extensively and rapidly 
increased in this district at present. 

A relatively small peach enterprise is located in the northwestern 
part of the State, centering about Mount Airy, in Surry County. 
Some tendency to establish peach orchards at some of the higher 
elevations in the western sections of the State is also reported. Again, 
in the southeastern part of North Carolina, at points in Duplin, Samp- 
son, Pender, Bladen, and Columbus Counties, rather extensive plant- 
ings have been made. Few of these, however, have as yet come into 
bearing. 

Great numbers of seedling peach trees are grown in the mountain 
regions, foothills, and adjacent areas in western North Carolina and 
adjoining States. The fruit of these is harvested and the seeds as- 
sembled for sale to nurserymen who plant them for the growing of 
stocks to be used in propagating peach trees. Western North Caro- 
lina thus supplies large quantities of the " natural peach pits " used 
b}^ nurserymen. 

Varieties. — The principal varieties are the Mayflower, Victor, Alex- 
ander, Yellow Swan, Greensboro, Arp, Carman, Connet, Hiley, 
Belle, and Elberta, with the last-named variety largely predomi- 
natiner. 



SOUTH CAROLINA. 



Distribution. — Peach growing for home use is widely distributed in 
South Carolina, as it is in most Southern States. Commercial inter- 
ests are located rather widely, but especially in Edgefield County 
along the Savannah Eiver and in Saluda County. Orchards having 
a commercial status also are found in Calhoun, Eichland, Kershaw, 
and Lancaster Counties. These counties occupy a strip through the 
center of the State which extends from the western extremity of the 
sand-hill region to the eastern extremity of the Piedmont region. In 
the western part, orchards occur more or less in Greenville, Pickens, 
and Oconee Counties. 

Varieties. — The Mayflower, Carman, Belle, and Elberta varieties 
comprise the bulk of the crop. 



peaches: production estimates, etc. 23 

t 

GEORGIA. 

Dhtnbution. — According to the Thirteenth Census there were 
about 10,600,000 peach trees of bearing age in Georgia in 1910, the 
largest number reported for any one State. In the combined number 
of trees of both bearing and nonbearing age, Georgia was exceeded 
by Texas and California. 

In yield California is far ahead of Georgia (see fig. 6), but, as 
noted under California, a large part of the peach crop of that State 
is used for drying and canning. In shipments of fresh fiiiit in 
seasons of a good crop Georgia normally leads all other States. 

In general the commercial peach interests of Georgia may be 
said to be in the central and northern parts of the State. A line 
extending from Augusta (in the east-central part of the State) iu 
a southwesterly direction toward Albany until it cuts the thirtj - 
second parallel of latitude (which is practically the latitude of 
Savannah and Americus), and then running directly west to the 
Georgia-Alabama State line, will divide the State into two sections, 
of which the northern contains practically all the commercial peach 
orchards. 

The following are the principal counties in which peaches are 
grown: In the northeastern part of the State, Habersham, White, 
Banks, Hall, Jackson, Elbert; in the northwestern part, Dade, 
"Walker, Catoosa, Whitefield, Murray, Chattooga, Gordon. Pickens, 
Floyd, Bartow, Cherokee, Polk, Paulding. Cobb, and Haralson, The 
above counties are north of the latitude of Atlanta. In the west- 
central part are Meriwether, Spalding, Pike, Monroe, Harris, 
Upson, Crawford, Bibb, Marion. Taylor, Macon, Houston, Stewart, 
and Sumter Counties. In the east-central part are Columbia, Mc- 
DuiRe, Warren, Glascock, Washington, Hancock, Putnam, Jasper, 
Jones, and Twiggs Counties. 

By far the largest center of production is Fort Valley, in Houston 
County. The next most important centers, on the basis of size, are 
adjacent areas in Crawford and Macon Counties. Several other 
counties immediately adjacent to these also contain large interests. 

Varwfies. — In the central sections the principal sorts are the May- 
flower, Greensboro, Dixie Queen, Early Rose, Carman, Waddell, 
Hiley, Belle, Hale (J. H.), and Elberta. Those in the northern 
sections are the Carman, Hiley, Belle, and Elberta. Since the very 
early varieties if grown in the northern sections would compete with 
the later and nuwe desirable fruit from central Georgia, they are not 
much planted there. The Elberta is planted in all sections of the 
State xGvy much more extensively than any other one sort. 



.24 BULLETIN 806, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

TLOEIDA. 

Distribution. — While peaches are grown more or less generally for 
home use throughout much of the central highland portion of Florida, 
the commercial production, measured in carloads, is rather small. 
The fruit, however, is marketed early in the season, before shipments 
begin from more northern points. The principal shipping points are 
in the northeastern quarter of the State, in Putnam, Volusia, and Lake 
Counties, and in closely adjoining areas in adjacent counties. Rep- 
resentative shipping and production points are Crescent City, Edgar, 
and McMeekin, in Putnam County ; Seville and De Land, in Volusia 
County ; Umatilla, in Lake County; and Lake Geneva, in the southern 
part of Clay County, which adjoins Putnam on the north. According 
to the Thirteenth Census Marion and Alachua Counties, adjoining 
Volusia and Putnam Counties on the west, contain large numbers of 
bearing trees compared with most other counties in the State, but 
no important centers of production are designated. 

Varieties. — The varieties of commercial importance grown in 
Florida are few in number. The Jewel is the leading sort, while the 
Waldo, Angel, and a fev/ others are grown to a limited extent. These 
all belong to the Peen-to race. They are grown little, if at all, out- 
side of Florida. A few varieties of the South China or Honey race 
are also grown in Florida, but probably no member of this race equals 
in importance those of the Peen-to race above named. 

EAST SOUTH-CENTRAL STATES. 

KENTUCKY. 

Distrihution. — Doubtless the most important commercial peach 
district in Kentucky is in the hilly section south and southeast of 
Louisville, in Jefferson and Bullitt Counties. Shepherdsville and 
Brooks, in the latter county, are perhaps the largest shipping sta- 
tions in this district at present. Bedford, in Thimble County, and 
Bowling Green, in Warren County, are other relatively important 
centers of production. These localities, except the latter, are in the 
north-central part of the State, along the Ohio Eiver. Certain other 
counties bordering that river, such as Campbell, Kenton, and Hen- 
derson, produce small quantities of peaches. They are also widely 
grown in most other parts of the State, but generally not on a com- 
mercial scale. 

Varieties. — The Elberta is the most prominent variety. The Car- 
man, Belle, Champion, Globe, and a few others are grown in small 
quantities. 

TENNESSEE. 

Distrihution. — Commercial peach growing in Tennessee is a rela- 
tively limited industry, yet many orchards of considerable commer- 
cial importance are found in a large number of counties in different 



peaches: PKODucTioisr estimates, etc. 25 

j^arts of the State. Doubtless the hirgest general district from -^-hich 
peaches are shipped in quantity is the lower portion of the Cumber- 
land or East Tennessee Valle}^ This district includes shipping 
points in several counties, of which the following are among the best 
known: Cleveland, in Bradley County; Sale Creek, in Hamilton 
County; Dayton and Spring City, in Ehea County; and Harriman 
and Kingston, in Eoane County. Orchards of some conmiercial 
standing are found in some other parts of the East Tennessee Valley, 
as in Knox, Hamblen, and Washington Counties, but the fruit from 
these sections is relatively unimportant in quantit3\ Formerly Taze- 
well and Cumberland Gap, in Claiborne County, were fairly large 
points of production. Though of much less importance than hereto- 
fore, some shipments are still made from these places. 

In the Cumberland Plateau region, which as a whole is not regarded 
as well adapted to fruit growing, Morgan is the only county that 
requires mention from the standpoint of peach production. 

In the Gulf Coastal Plains region, in the western part of the State, 
peaches are grown commercially to some extent. Orchards are found 
in Obion, Madison, Gibson, and possibly other counties. 

Varieties. — Early Wheeler (Red Bird Cling), Greensboro, Carman, 
Belle, and Elberta varieties make up the bulk of the crop. Not all 
these varieties are of equal importance in the different sections, and 
the two first named are not widely grown, but for early sorts they 
are of some value in most sections of the State. 



Dlstrihutlon. — In Alabama there are several regions where peach 
growing is of considerable importance. Probably the largest inter- 
ests are in the southwestern part of the State, in Escambia County, 
centering about Atmore. In the northwestern part, especially in 
Walker, Winston, Marion, and Franklin Counties, there are many 
orchards. Jasper, Haley ville, Winfield, and Phil Campbell are rep- 
resentative shipping points in these counties. 

Individual orchards of commercial size, varying from a few acres 
in extent to 60 acres or more, including one reported to contain 1,100 
acres, are more or less widely distributed in other parts of the State, 
especially in the central, eastern, and northern counties. Jackson, 
Etowah, Cullman, Jefferson, Clay, Chambers, Lee, and Macon are the 
counties in which the more important of these somewhat isolated 
commercial orchards occur. 

Varieties. — The Elberta is by far the most in p ortant variety 
throughout Alabama. A few earlier varieties, including the May- 
flower, Carman, and Belle {Belle of Georgia) , are grown in some of 
the orchards. 



26 BULLETIN" 806, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



MISSISSIPPI. 



Distnhution. — Though peaches are widely distributed throughout 
most parts of Mississippi, they are grown largely for home use or 
local markets, the commercial interests being nearly negligible. A 
few carloads are usually shipped each season from Jasper and Wayne 
Counties, in the east south-central part of the State; from Union, 
Prentiss, Pontotoc, and Lee Counties, in the northeastern part; and 
possibly in some seasons also from certain other sections. The total 
commercial shipments in any year include but a small number of 
carloads. 

VaHeties. — ^The Elberta is the principal variety. Other varieties 
commonly grown in Alabama and Georgia also are grown to a 
limited extent. 

WEST SOUTH-CENTRAL STATES. 

ARKANSAS. 

DistHhution. — By referring to the map (fig. 2) it will be seen 
that the most extensive plantings occur in the western part of Arkan- 
sas, gradually decreasing toward the center, with comparativelj^' few 
in the eastern part of the State. From a commercial standpoint the 
largest interests are in Benton, Washington, Carroll, and Searcy 
Counties, in the northwestern part of the State; in Crawford, Se- 
bastian, Franklin, Johnson, Pope, Yell, Conway, and Faulkner 
Counties, in the Arkansas River valley between Fort Smith and 
Little Rock; and in Scott, Polk, Sevier, Howard, Pike, and Hemp- 
stead Counties, in the western and southwestern parts. At present 
the largest concentration of interests is probably in Pike County, 
which is estimated to have 6,000 acres of Elberta peaches, and in 
Howard County, with an estimate of 2,000 acres of the same variety. 

Varieties. — The Elberta so largely predominates that it practically 
represents the peach industry throughout the State. North of the 
Arkansas River a few Carman, Mamie Ross, Belle, and several other 
varieties are grown, while south of the river the Early Wheeler {Red 
Bird Cling) is planted more or less in addition to some of the other 
minor varieties named above. In som.e of the more recent plantings 
in different parts of the State the Early Elberta and Hale (J. H.) 
r.re being tried. 

LOUISIANA. 

Disfrihitfion. — Peach growing occupies an unimportant place in 
Louisiana. While more or less generally distributed over the State, 
peaches are produced, with few exceptions, only for home use. At a 
small number of points in Bossier, Claiborne, Lincoln, and possibly 
other parishes in the extreme northern part of the State small quan- 



peaches: productiox estimates, etc. 27 

titles are grown for shipping. This area is in reality a southern 
extension of the peach district in southwestern Arkansas. 

Varieties. — The principal varieties are tlie same as tliose grown in 
other Southern States of the same latitude, the Elberta leading. In 
the southern part varieties of the Peen-to race, such as those named 
under Florida, occur to a limited extent. 

OKLAHOMA. 

Distribution. — The peach interests in Oklahoma are rather vari- 
able. No parts of the State are preeminently adapted to peach 
growing, j^et in favorable seasons peaches succeed well throughout 
most of the region east of the ninety-eiglith meridian, which is ap- 
proximately in line north and south with Enid, El Eeno, and Chick- 
asha. Not many orchards are found west of this line, nor are there 
interests of nmch importance in the northern tier of counties. By 
this elimination that part of the State Ij'ing east of the ninety- 
eighth meridian and south of the border counties on the north may 
be designated as the region in which most of the commercial peach 
orchards occur. Within this area conmiercial orchards are found 
in most of the counties, though with comparatively small concentra- 
tion of interests in any one locality. Perhaps Guthrie and its im- 
mediate environs in Logan County, and Checotah, in Mcintosh 
Count}', ma}' be designated as representing some of the more im- 
portant centers at present. On account of its geographic position 
Oklahoma is subject to mild winters and warm spells during which 
the peach buds become tender. Not infrequently temperature con- 
ditions occur which, though not unseasonably low, may cause serious 
injury to the fruit buds after they have started. Because of this, 
peach growing in Oklahoma is probably less thriving than it other- 
wise would be. For a similar reason, the status of commercial 
peach growing has changed materially in many localities in a num- 
ber of other States. 

Varieties. — The Elberta comprises so large a proportion of the trees 
in commercial orchards that hardly any other sort requires mention. 
A few Early Wlieeler trees are grown in some orchards; also May- 
flower, Carman, Mamie Ross, Belle, Early Crawfoi-d, Chinese Cling, 
Heath, and some others. 

TEXAS. 

Disfrihution. — In general it may be said that peaches are grovrn 
more or less throughout most portions of northern Texas. Limited 
attention has also been given to peach culture in the southeastern 
section. The principal commercial interests are located in the north- 
eastern part. A line passing through Sherman, Dallas, Waco, and 
then directly east to the Sabine River, which is the boundary between 



28 BULLETIN 806, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

Texas and Louisiana, would include the more important commercial 
peach-producing counties. Important peach interests exist in a con- 
siderable proportion of the counties in the region thus outlined, and 
many stations from, which peaches are shipped are located therein. 
Tyler, Winona, Athens, Jacksonville, Palestine, Pittsburg, Sulphur 
Springs, Winnsboro, Mount Vernon, Mount Pleasant, and Marshall 
are more or less typical centers of production in this area. Orchards 
of considerable size are also found in other counties, where the in- 
tersts are somewhat isolated or represent relatively small community 
enterprises. Such orchards occur in Colorado, Erath, Eastland, 
Callahan, Montague, and probably in other counties. 

Varieties. — The Elberta variety predominates, but others are con- 
siderably planted, such as the Arp, Yellow Swan, Early Wheeler, 
Carman, Mamie Boss, and Slappey. Certain varieties that have been 
developed in Limestone County appear to possess characteristics that 
may prove of great value in northeastern Texas and other regions 
where the climatic conditions are similar. This group includes varie- 
ties designated as Tena, Millard, Anita, Toughina, Lizzie, Frank, 
Barbara, Katie, and several others which ripen about with the El- 
berta variety and later. 

MOUNTAIN STATES. 
MONTANA. 

Distribution. — It is substantially true that peaches are not grown 
in Montana. The Thirteenth Census reported 538 trees of bearing 
age for the entire State, these occurring on 49 farms; also 3,386 trees 
not of bearing age on 117 farms. In most sections of the State the 
trees can not survive the winter conditions, but in the sections about 
Bigfork, Plains, and Plamilton, in the western part, and possibly in 
some of the other milder localities a few trees have been planted. 

Varieties. — Little information can be give regarding varieties. The 
Triumph, Champion, Foster, and a few others have been planted, but 
apparently with very uncertain results. 



Distrihution. — Peaches are grown to a limited extent for home 
use in most sections of Idaho in which a commercial fruit industry 
has been developed, but the commercial peach production is limited 
very largely to three regions : (1) The Lewiston district, where a large 
portion of the fruit is grown on a high bench about 3 miles south- 
east of the town of Lewiston. (2) The Payette district', which con- 
tains a larger acreage of fruit than any other district in the State, 
comprising the areas along the Payette Eiver from its mouth to 
Horseshoe Bend, along the Snake River between Payette and 
Weiser, and up the Weiser Eiver as far as Council. Wliile peaches 



PEACHES : PRODLTCTION^ ESTIMATES, ETC. 29 

have been planted more or less in different parts of this district, it 
is in the Payette River valley, in the vicinity of Emmett on the 
Emmett bench that the most extensive plantings are found. (3) The 
Snake River Canyon district, which extends for a distance of some 
125 or 130 miles along the Snake River eastward from the point 
where it crosses the State line into Oregon. Fruit is planted in 
coves and other places along the river where conditions are favor- 
able. The North Idaho, Palouse, Blackfoot, and Idaho Falls dis- 
tricts are not well suited to peach growing. 

Varieties. — The Early Crawford, Elberta, and Late Crawford are 
the varieties principally mentioned by Vincent and Downing.^ The 
Early Hale is named for the Snake River Canyon district in addi- 
tion to the Early Crawford and Elberta. The latter variety is far 
more extensively grown than any other. 

Additional varieties grovrn in a small way in several regions of the 
State include the Alexander, Triumph, Carman, Champion, and a 
few others. 

WYOillXG. 

As in the adjacent parts of the States which surround Wyoming, 
peach growing is made impossible by the severity of the climatic 
conditions. One report states that peaches in Woming are grown 
"lOnly as curiosities. The trees have to be laid down and buried in 
winter." 



Distribution. — The commercial peach districts in Colorado are lo- 
cated in irrigated valleys. The most important district is in the 
Grand Valley, in Mesa County. Palisades and Clifton are the 
largest shipping points. Other sections of some importance are the 
Gunnison Valley, in Delta County, centering about Delta and Austin; 
the North Fork of the Gunnison, also in Delta County, centering 
about Paonia and Hotchkiss ; and the Uncompahgre Valley, in Mont- 
rose County, centering about Montrose. Small interests also are 
found in the Las Animas Valley, in La Plata County. 

East of the Great Divide the only areas of commercial importance 
are in the Arkansas Valley about Canon City, in the eastern part of 
Fremont County, and at a few points in close proximity to the 
Arkansas River in Pueblo and Otero Counties. 

Vaneties. — ^In all of these sections the Elberta is by far the most 
important variety. Very small quantities, relatively, of a few other 
sorts, such as the Alexander, Carman, Belle, Heath, and Salwey, are 
produced. 

1 Vincent, C. C, and Downing, G. J. Recommended varieties of fruit for Idaho. Idaho 
Agr. Bxp. Sta. Bull. 83, 14 p., map. 1015. 



30 BULLETIISr 806, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



NEW MEXICO. 



Dutrihution. — Peach growin<r in New INIexico. like the growing of 
other kinds of fruit there, is confined almost entirely to irrigated 
valleys. The principal districts and centers where peach growing 
is important are the following: The Pecos Valley, especially about 
Carlsbad, in Edd}^ County ; the Rio Grande Valley, with Las Cruces, 
in Dona Ana County, the most important locality; Otero County, 
about Tularosa ; and the San Juan Count^^ district, in the north- 
Avestern corner of the State, centering especially about Farmington. 
Smaller interests exist also in some of the other fruit-growing areas, 
such as the Mimbres Valley district in Luna County ; the Portales 
section in Roosevelt County, the latter being a recently developed 
fruit-growing district; the north-central part of the State, in Colfax 
County, where small areas irrigated by various mountain streams are 
devoted to peaches; the San Miguel County district; a small district 
in northern Santa Fe and in southern Rio Arriba counties; and a 
similar district in the central part of Taos County. 

Yarieties. — In the three or four most important districts the Alex- 
ander, Hynes {Hynes Surprise)^ Carman, Texas {Texas King), 
Mamie I^oss, Champion, Elberta, Late Crawford. Crothers, and Sal- 
wey varieties are largely grown. In those of small importance the 
fruit grown consists mostly of the Elberta and Lat« Crawford sorts. 

The Alexander and Hynes (neither of which appears to be much 
grown) are late in blossoming, while the Texas, Mamie Ross, and 
Crothers are medium late; hence, they are less likely to be injured 
by spring frosts than the earliei' blossoming sorts. 



Distribution. — The report of the Arizona Commission of Agricul- 
ture and Horticulture for the year ended June 30, 191.5, shows that 
of the fruit trees and vines of the 10 leading kinds imported into the 
State for the preceding fiscal year, 1-4.5 per cent, or 94,752 in num- 
ber, consisted of peach trees. It was further estimated that 30,500 
peach trees grown in local nurseries were planted also during the 
same year. 

While peach growing in Arizona has not attracted wide attention 
from a connnercial standpoint, there are three irrigated valleys in 
which the interests are of considerable local importance — the Salt 
River Valley in Maricopa County, the Verde Valley in Yavapai 
County, and the Gila Valley in Graham County. 

Varieties. — The Elberta is largely grown. A few Belle, Salwey, 
and possibly other sorts are occasionally found. According to Mc- 
Clatchie and Coit,^ a considerable number of varieties do well in the 

1 MeClatchie, A. .T.. Coit. ,T. E.. and others. Uelation of weather to crops and varieties 
adapted to Arizoua conditious. Aiiz. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 78, pp. 44-118. 1916. 



peaches: productiox estimates, etc. 31 

southern valleys in the State, those definiteh' specified being the 
Alexander, DeAvey, St. John, Briggs, Belle, Elberta, Late Crawford, 
AVheatland, Krumniel, S3dphide, and Salwey. 



Distrihution. — In Utah the orchard interests are in valleys which, 
in general, are located to the westward and along the course of the 
main range of the Wasatch Mountains, in the north-central part of 
the State. The principal centers of peach production are as follows : 
The extreme eastern part of Box Elder County, about Willard, 
Brigham, Honeyville, Dewey ville, Tremonton, and Corinne; Weber 
County, about Ogden, Roy, and Uinta ; Davis Count}', about Clear- 
field and Woods Cross; Salt Lake County, about Salt Lake City; 
and in Utah County. a]:>out Provo, Springville, and Payson. 

Vm'ieties. — One estimate places the Elberta at 90 per cent of ths 
conmiercial product of the State. The Early Elberta, Foster, Sellers, 
and a few others are grown in very limited quantities. 



In most parts of Nevada the climatic conditions are not suited to 
the culture of peaches, and very little attempt is made to grow them. 

PACIFIC STATES. 

WASHINGTON. 

Distrihution. — The peach districts in Washington are coincident 
with the apple districts, though not all of the latter contain i)each 
interests of importance. The most prominent district with reference 
to peaches is the Yakima "^^illey, in which this fruit is grown at 
numerous points between North Yakima, in Yakima County, and the 
junction of the Yakima and Columbia Eivers, in Benton County; 
at Kennewick, located a few miles below the mouth of the Yakima 
Kiver in Benton County; and at Pasco, directly aci-oss the Columbia 
Eiver, in Franklin County. 

The Wenatchee Valley, centering at Wenatchee in Chelan County, 
is the second most important peach district; the third is the Snake 
River valley, especially that portion included in the southern part of 
Whitman County, where at various points peaches are grov\'n on a 
relatively small commercial basis. This valley is virtually continuous 
with the Lewiston district in Idaho. In the Walla Walla Valley, ay 
in certain other districts, peach interests have been developed on ii 
sufficiently large scale to produce some fruit for shipping, J>ut the 
two valleys first mentioned are by far the largest producing districts 



32 BULLETIN 806, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

in the State. The Milton-Freewater district in Oregon is a part of 
the WaUa Walhi Valley. In all of these valleys most of the peach 
trees are interplanted in the apple orchards. As the apple trees de- 
velop, the peach trees are taken out. As a result, there is at present 
a more or less rapid and constant decrease in the extent of the peach 
industry in Washington. 

Varieties. — There are no varieties that are in any way character- 
istic of these districts. The most important sorts are the Triumph, 
Carman, Champion, Early Elberta, Early Crawford, Elberta, Late 
Crawford, and Salwey. The Elberta is the principal variety in most 
localities. 

OREGON. 

Distrihution. — Peaches are grown in Oregon to a considerable ex- 
tent as fillers interplanted in apple orchards. To this extent, there- 
fore, peach growing in this State is a temporary enterprise. In some 
sections, however, peach trees have been planted on a somewhat per- 
manent orchard basis. This is the case in The Dalles district in 
Wasco County, in the Ashland and Merlin districts in the Rogue 
Eiver Valley, and in the vicinity of Salem in the Willamette Val- 
ley. Important valleys where many peaches have been interplanted 
in apple orchards include such localities as the Milton-Freewater 
district in Umatilla County, this being a part of the Walla Walla 
Valley, the Hood River Valley, the Umpqua Valley, and various 
23oints in the Willamette Valley in addition to Salem, which is men- 
tioned above. 

Varieties. — A large number of different varieties are grown in the 
various districts, the more important and widely distributed of 
which include the Alexander, Early Crawford, Early Charlotte, 
Elberta, Late Crawford, Muir, Phillips, and Salwey. In most in- 
stances in the districts where peaches are of special commercial 
value the problem in selecting varieties is more largely that of se- 
curing, sorts that ripen at a desired time or are suited to the pur- 
pose for which they are to be used than of choosing varieties that 
will develop well. 

CALIFORNIA. 

Distribution. — The peach interests of California surpass those of 
any other State in both quantity and value of the product. Ac- 
cording to the Thirteenth Census, there were nearly 1,500,000 more 
trees not of bearing age in California in 1910 than in any other 
State, though in number of trees of bearing age Texas and Georgia 
each surpassed California. Moreover, the industry is highly special- 
ized. While large quantities of fruit are marketed in the fresh 
state, the planting of varieties intended especially for canning as 



peaches: production estimates, etc. 



33 



well as of varieties particularly adapted for drying is extensively 
practiced in some districts. The relative importance of peaches for 
canning, compared with the rest of the country, is indicated by the 
following figures from the Thirteenth Census. (Table IV.) 



Table IV. 



-Quantity and value of canned peaches in California and in the 
United States in 1909 and lOl'i. 



States. 


Number of cases canned. 


Value. 


1909 


1914 


1909 


1914 




1,149,590 
317,623 


2,922,637 
485,209 


$3,013,203 
740, 495 


?8, 085, 831 
899,942 


All other States 




Total for the United States 


1,467,213 


3,407,906 


3, 753, 69S 


9,585,773 





A comparison of the figures presented in Table lY emphasizes 
the great imx^ortance of the canning industry to the peach growers 
in California. Wliile the proportion varies more or less from 
year to year, depending largely upon crop and market' conditions 
in the different States, the actual quantity canned in any year 
in other parts of the country is always small in comparison with the 
California product. 

Practically the entire commercial output of dried peaches in this 
country is produced in California. It is estimated that about 90 per 
cent of the crop, as a rule, is either dried or canned and about 10 per 
cent shipped in the fresh state. 

There are two main districts in •R'hich a large proportion of the 
peaches are produced, viz, the Sacramento and the San Joaquin 
Valleys. In the latter, the peaches are grown largely for canning 
and drying. In the Sacramento Valley along the foothills the ship- 
ping varieties predominate, but in the valley areas large quantities 
of fruit both for canning and for drying are produced. 

According to the report, of the California State Commission of 
Horticulture ^ Fresno County now has about 35,000 acres of peach 
trees of bearing age — nearly five times the acreage reported for any 
other one county. 

The principal counties from the standpoint of peach growing in 
the Sacramento Valley and foothills are Placer, Sacramento, Solano, 
Sutter Tehama, and Yolo; in the San Joaquin Valley, Fresno, 
Kings, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare; in other parts 
of the State, Santa Clara, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Diego, and 
San Bernardino. Orchards are more or less widely distributed 
throughout various other districts. 



• Weldon, G. P. The acreage of fruits, bearing and nonbearinj 
In Mo. Bui. State Com. Hort. [Cal.], v. 5, no, 3, p. 105. 1916. 



by counties, in 1915. 



34 BULLETIN 806, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

Varieties. — A large niiniber of varieties are grown in California, 
but the bulk of the crop consists of comparatively few sorts. For 
canning, the firm-fleshed yellow clingstone varieties are largely used. 
The principal cling varieties grown for canning are the Tnskena 
{Tuscan)^ Hauss, Johnson, Walton, Albright Cling, and Phillips. Of 
freestone varieties, the M'uir and Lovell are canned to some extent, 
and for drying they are by far the most important. The Eiberta is 
dried in relatively small quantities. Those grown for shipping fresh 
are the Alexander, St. John, Early Hale, Early Crawford, Foster, 
Susciuelianna, Eiberta, McKevitt, McDevitt, Salwey, Levy, and some 
others. 



INDEX OF STATES. 



Alabama 25 

Arizona 30 

Arkansas 2G 

California 32 

Colorado . 29 

Connecticut 12 

Delaware IS 

Florida 24 

Georgia , 23 

Idaho 28 

Illinois 15 

Indiana 14 

Iowa 16 

Kansas 18 

Kentucky 24 

Louisiana 26 

Maine: , 10 

Maryland 11) 

Massachusetts 11 

Michigan 15 

Minnesota 16 

Mississippi 26 

Missouri 17 

Montana 2S 



Page. 

Nebraska 17 

Nevada 31 

New Hanipsliire 10 

New Jersey 13 

New Mexico 30 

New York 12 

North Carolina 22 

North Dakota 17 

Ohio 14 

Oklahoma , 27 

Oregon , 32 

Pennsylvania , 13 

Rhode Island 11 

South Carolina 22 

South Dakota 17 

Tennessee 'lA 

Texas 27 

Utah 31 

Vermont 10 

Virginia 20 

Washington 31 

West Virginia 21 

Wisconsin 16 

Wyoming 29 

35 



ADDITIONAL COPIES 

OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PEOCUBED FROM 

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON, D. C. 

AT 

10 CENTS PER COPY 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




DQDmi7Tb77 



